THERE IS A FREE LUNCH BREAK: Ben Valdes (left) and Tramell Thompson, activists within Transport Workers Union Local 100’s Progressive Action caucus, challenged a union contract clause that allows New York City Transit to interrupt members’ half-hour lunch breaks provided they are compensated for the time if they got less than 20 minutes to eat. The state Department of Labor upheld their complaint but has not penalized management yet, even though it did not correct the situation within 30 days, as ordered.

THERE IS A FREE LUNCH BREAK: Ben Valdes (left) and Tramell Thompson, activists within Transport Workers Union Local 100’s Progressive Action caucus, challenged a union contract clause that allows New York City Transit to interrupt members’ half-hour lunch breaks provided they are compensated for the time if they got less than 20 minutes to eat. The state Department of Labor upheld their complaint but has not penalized management yet, even though it did not correct the situation within 30 days, as ordered.

A three-year push by an opposition group within Transport Workers Union Local 100 has prompted the state Department of Labor to notify the Metropolitan Transportation Authority that it is legally required to provide subway workers an uninterrupted half-hour lunch period.

Both the MTA and Local 100 agree lunch breaks for the rapid-transit workforce are governed by their collective-bargaining agreement, which provides for a paid lunch as well as compensation for missed breaks.

No Substitute for Law

But Ben Valdes and Tramell Thompson, both Progressive Action activists and Train Operators, initiated the complaint, maintaining that every worker under state law was entitled to a half-hour lunch break and that a collective-bargaining agreement can’t supersede that law, even if employees are compensated for the missed time. Mr. Thompson was a candidate for Local 100 president in last year’s union election.

The Department of Labor declined to comment on its notification, which mentioned possible penalties if the MTA didn’t come into compliance with the law by Aug. 14.

In a phone interview, Mr. Valdes said he wrote state Labor Commissioner Roberta Reardon about the issue in 2016.

“All the case law that I read said you could not waive that right with a collective-bargaining agreement,” he said.

Unhealthy Practice

Mr. Valdes added that wolfing down a sandwich in 10 minutes and returning to service is a hardship with potentially significant health consequences for workers with low blood-sugar.

“They don’t care,” he said. “They don’t care what kind of condition you have, if you are pregnant. The railroad comes first for them.”

“Back in 2016 a pregnant Train Conductor had come up to me and said she wasn’t allowed to take her lunch because she had to make her scheduled run,” he recounted. “I took offense at that. How can the MTA allow a pregnant woman to have to choose between eating or going to the bathroom?”

On July 15, Department of Labor Senior Labor Standards Investigator Vincent Hammond wrote Mr. Valdes that his agency had put the MTA on notice of the legal requirement for an uninterrupted lunch break.

‘Potential Penalties’

“We have also informed them of the potential civil penalties that they may incur if they do not meet these requirements under Article 7, Sec. 218.1 of the NYS Labor Law,” he wrote. Mr. Hammond also noted that the agency had 30 days to “comply with these guidelines.”

Mr. Valdes said he followed up with additional correspondence to the DOL after he “worked without any kind of a 30-minute break” on Aug. 6. He has not gotten a response.

The MTA confirmed receipt of Mr. Hammond’s correspondence and emphasized there had “been no finding of wrongdoing against New York City Transit in this matter.”

“Under long-standing and legally compliant provisions negotiated with the union in the collective-bargaining agreement, NYC Transit’s thousands of conductors and train operators are provided paid lunch breaks as well as compensation in the event of missed break time,” the MTA said in a statement. “This practice allows NYC Transit and its train crews to successfully meet the significant challenge of keeping the subways moving for millions of New Yorkers every day.”

What Contract Stipulates

An MTA source said the union contract “provides for a 30-minute lunch between the 3rd and 6th hour of work” and that every “Train Operator or Conductor who has a lunch period that is less than 20 minutes is compensated for a full 30-minute period at full pay.”

On this issue, Local 100 was on the same page.

“TWU Local 100 works under a Collective Bargaining Agreement,” the union said in a statement. “We have not received any directive from the Department of Labor purporting to supersede the CBA.”

The skirmish over an uninterrupted lunch period is playing out as Local 100 and the MTA remain far apart in contract talks, with the union’s Executive Committee rejecting management’s initial offer as “insulting.” A pact that expired in mid-May remains in effect.

We depend on the support of readers like you to help keep our publication strong and independent. Join us.

(2) comments

This doesn’t add up. If the DOL “upheld” the complaint, why isn’t the DOL saying that in this article? If the DOL found the authority is not doing what the law says they have to do then why haven’t they fined the MTA or done something to stop it from happening again? The contract says if you have to work through lunch you get extra pay. It doesn’t say you can park the train and tell the dispatcher you are taking lunch no matter what he says. This article doesn’t make sense.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd,
racist or sexually-oriented language.PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another
person will not be tolerated.Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone
or anything.Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism
that is degrading to another person.Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on
each comment to let us know of abusive posts.Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness
accounts, the history behind an article.

YES. Besides longtime problems on Rikers that led to harsh criticism of a culture that a former Federal prosecutor said stokes violence, its isolation makes it difficult to transport inmates to courthouses and creates a hardship for family members who want to visit them.

NO. A steady rise in shootings in several boroughs this year may be an indication that crime is on the rise and the smaller jails won't be able to house all the violent felons who deserve to be locked up. And who knows whether whoever's Mayor in seven years will favor the plan?

News Tips

We cover everything that affects civil servants. If you have labor-related news to share, we want to hear from you!